District 2 Vacancy - How Did It Happen and What Happens Next?

At our first City Council meeting last week, we declared two vacancies, one on the Planning Board and one on the City Council for the District 2 seat.  Because vacancies on the Council don’t come along too often, I thought I’d post a bit about this one, to provide some context.

 

Leading up to the most recent election, sitting District 2 Councilor Christian Scorzoni was running unopposed for re-election.  He and his family had been considering an in-town move and, as fate would have it, their house sold after Labor Day.  Between the City Charter and the laws of the Commonwealth, there are strict rules governing the nomination of candidates for public office and the finalizing and publishing of official ballots.  Once knowing that he was going to be moving out of District 2, Mr. Scorzoni found himself on the official ballot and unable to remove himself.  And it was far too late for anyone else to get on the ballot, as well.  And according to the City Charter, a City Councilor representing a district must be a resident of that district at the time of election and at least for the first 12 months of office, in order to continue to represent the district (and must always remain a resident of Amesbury).

Once Councilor Scorzoni announced his move, two residents in District 2 decided to mount ‘write-in’ campaigns, Mary Louise Bartley and former District 2 Councilor Mary Chatigny.  The Newburyport Daily News published several articles on the matter, including profiles of each of the write-in candidates.  Other social media means were used to publicize both candidates. 

Nonetheless, on Election Day, Mr. Scorzoni handily out-polled both Ms. Bartley and Ms. Chatigny.  The initial results were: 

Christian Scorzoni	271	39%
Blanks	149	22%
Mary Louise Bartley	140	20%
Mary Chatigny	125	18%

When the City Clerk held a recount for the Mayoral vote, Ms. Bartley requested a recount of the District 2 vote as well, and presented a vote challenger on the day of the recount to review ballots on her behalf.  She and Mr. Scorzoni lost votes and Ms. Chatigny gained votes.  The final District 2 results were:

Christian Scorzoni	269	39%
Blanks	146	21%
Mary Louise Bartley	138	20%
Mary Chatigny	133	19%

Like any good foundation document, the City Charter has provisions for unexpected vacancies on the City Council, and this includes the possibility that a runner-up in the most recent election can take the vacant seat automatically, if they have received enough of the votes cast in the district, in this case, thirty percent.  Here is what the Charter says, in Section 3-4, Filling of Vacancies [emphasis mine]:

If a vacancy occurs in the office of city councillor, whether by failure to elect or otherwise, the vacancy shall be filled by the unelected candidate receiving the highest votes in the same election, if any, provided that candidate received at least thirty percent of the vote for that office. Said candidate shall be notified by the city clerk of the vacancy, and if the candidate declines to be sworn to office within ten days, has moved from the city, or is otherwise unable to serve, the council shall choose a successor to fill the vacancy from among the voters entitled to vote for such office. Any person so chosen shall take the oath of office and commence to serve forthwith. No vacancy shall be filled, in the manner herein provided, if a regular city election is to be held within 120 days following the date the vacancy is declared to exist. The city council shall be the sole judge of whether a vacancy shall exist in the office of city councillor and may declare an office vacant by a majority vote of the council.

This 30% threshold is a change from the original City of Amesbury Charter, from 1996.  The original Charter had all of the same language, including a runner-up threshold for automatically being seated, but the threshold was only set at 25% of the total vote.  This change was approved by Amesbury votes in 2011 along with a number of other changes to the Charter.  I’ve been hearing some real mis-information regarding this rule and this Charter change recently, so let me clarify how it came about. 

I was appointed to the Charter Review Committee in 2007 and got to serve on it with some great folks (including Charles Labella, Roger Deschenes, Christopher Yorke and others).  The Review Committee was tasked for looking at the Charter 10 years into its life, evaluate how well it was working and propose any changes.  Section 3-4 was discussed at length in our review.  Amesbury had just gone through the tumultuous exercise of filling a vacancy in District 5, when Hank Bennick resigned mid-term.  About a half-dozen folks applied and Tom Iaccobucci was appointed to serve out the term.  So we had a living example of how the process worked to look at.  

We felt that looking to a runner-up in the most recent election was perfectly legitimate, as a means to fill a vacancy.  But we also felt that 25% was a rather low threshold.  This means that, in theory, someone could lose an election by 50% (75% to 25%) and still get an automatic buy into a seat.  Raising the limit to 30% still struck us as rather low but you have to start somewhere; raise it too close to 50% and no-one would ever make it.  This recommendation was picked up by the Mayor, vetted by the Council, approved by the voters and, ultimately, ratified by the State Legislature and Attorney General, in their acceptance of our Home Rule Charter.

Where does that leave us?   Neither write-in candidate came close to crossing the 30% threshold.  The plurality of the voters in District 2 chose Mr. Scorzoni, who was not even eligible.  More ballots were blank than were cast for either of the write-in candidates (taken separately).  The election delivered no results that could be used to seat a District 2 Councilor.  The Charter is clear on what comes next.  The task of appointing the District 2 Councilor falls to the 8 sitting City Councilors, once we declared the seat 'vacant'.  

Interested District 2 residents need only submit an application to the City Clerk by February 5 at 12:00 p.m., to be considered at the February 11 Council Meeting.  As of this writing, at least one District 2 resident has submitted an application to the City Clerk, Mary Louise Bartley.  

For myself, I will be looking for the same qualifications that I looked for when I voted for At-Large Councilors last fall: history of public service, knowledge of municipal and financial affairs, commitments to the continued investment in Amesbury’s infrastructure and public school system, and support for economic growth (the DPW re-location and Lower Millyard re-development in particular).  I hope to see a number of folks come forward and I look forward to interviewing candidates on the 11^th and identifying one that I can support with my vote.